Nigel Shipston

Thank you for your comments. Lynel I resonate with you “No. 4” we have had to drop prices but also dont want to step through the cheap door. I spend much of my time repairing material that is poor, and in fact am going to stop soon too, because the same providers that have gone cheap then expect an expert to charge cheap.

The onus is still on…[Read more]

Hi Lynel,
I have now worked out how I will approach this issue in future – it will take a few day to set up in full.

The skills-universe strategy will be only to accept training material that has been approved by peer group or subject matter experts – or satisfied customer record.

Those people will need to submit their approval to me & only…[Read more]

Hi Sylvia

You are most welcome!

Yes evaluation structures are in place for sure for qualification development as well as quality assurance! There has never been a proper structure in place for the learning material development industry, which in turn have made it very difficult for the learning material developers that design and develop…[Read more]

Dear Lynel,
Thank you. I really appreciate your comprehensive explanation of the history.

What is very clear to me is that we have the structures in place for qualification development, and we have the structures in place for quality assurance. But we do not have any structures in place for the control of the material development industry.

I…[Read more]

Hi Sylvia,
Yes, the learning material will be evaluated against the submitted matrix document, on the site visit. The QCTO Curriculum document is the standard, and therefor the provider needs to meet the requirements of the curriculum.

The SETAs were established almost 2 decades ago, and had to build on their own evaluation process. And this is…[Read more]

Hi Pieter,
I was looking at your response again, comparing with the response from Lynel – you say “material provided by the SETA”.
So this material was actually provided by the SETA?

Hi Lynel,
Thank you for your response. I have edited it into paragraphs, so that it is easier to follow.

If I understand, to summarise, the QCTO does evaluate the training material to be used at the SDP site – against the matrix. But the QCTO does not endorse any training material.

So is there any reason why the SETAs should not be following the…[Read more]

A very important discussion. When applying for accreditation to the QCTO, one of the documents that needs to be included in the application file, is the matrix. It is very clear that the learning material should meet the requirements of the published QCTO Curriculum document (this is where the standard is).

The rumour doing the rounds that…[Read more]

Hi Pieter
Thank you so much for your post. I really value your contribution as a subject matter expert, who can speak to the details of an actual implementation.

Hi Sylvia/Tass

Thank you so much for sharing your concerns with regard to the quality of material “endorsed” by the respective SETA’s. From my point of view, as a subject matter expert, the cirriculum document does not guarantee adherence to learning standards unless it is subjected to peer evaluation. I facilitated a national certificate course…[Read more]

Hi Tass,
Thank you for your post.
I have three comments:
first: a few days ago I posted in the Helpdesk a request for members to comment on the skills-universe – as I am in the process of reviewing how we should go forward, & what changes I should make.

I only received two comments – one comment was from Kevin, who posted:
“Personally I would…[Read more]

I have seen this, and know about it. There are two concerns – the QCTO never indicated that they would not be Quality Assuring material initially (or have I missed something) and what does this mean:
“Please note further that any quality assurance functions undertaken by Sector Education Training Authorities (SETA)s are functions that have been…[Read more]